Ill 


THE  GRADUATE  AND 
THE  PEOPLE. 


<&ammmttmmt  KbbttBB, 

BOSTON  UNIVERSITY, 

By  THE  HONOURABLE  WILLIAM  RENWICK  RTDDELL, 
L.H.D.,  F.R.  HIST.  SOC,  Etc.,         •* 
Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Ontario. 

TREMONT  TEMPLE.  BOSTON, 
Wednesday,  June  the  Third,  Nineteen  Hundred  and  Fourteen. 


n>.  i 


LA"v^, 


Sity 


Op 


'^iVOi^ 


<*553T 


a.JAMK 


Wt\t  (graduate  and  %  tysaplt. 

Commencement  Address,  Boston  University, 
Tremont  Temple,    Boston,    Wednesday,    June   3rd,   1914, 

BY 

THE    HONOURABLE    WILLIAM    RENWICK    RIDDELL, 


With  the  Compliments  of 

William  Renwick  Riddell. 


receive  the  benefits  of  the  higher  and  the  highest  edu- 
cation will  be  wholly  exempt  from  the  failings  and  short- 
comings of  our  common  humanity,  they  must  needs 
be  trained  to  think  and  to  discriminate,  to  differentiate 
the  superficial  and  ephemeral  from  the  essential  and 
eternal. 

It  is  with  full  consciousness  of  the  manner  of  men 
and  women  I  am  addressing,  that  I  speak:  I  may  not 
carry  you  with  me  in  all  respects;  but  at  least,  in  a 
University  audience,  careful  thought  must  go  before 
adjudication,  reasoned  judgment  before  condemnation 
as  deliberate  and  well-grounded  approbation  before 
acceptance. 

Civis  Britannicus  sum — Canadian  to  the  finger  tips 
— proud  of  the  flag  which  floats  over  my  northern  home, 

l 


TU 


HJIWND 1  MM& 


Commencement  Address,  Boston  University, 
Tremont  Temple,    Boston,    Wednesday,    June   3rd,   1914, 

BY 

THE    HONOURABLE    WILLIAM    RENWICK    RIDDELL, 
L.H.D.,  F.R.  HIST.  SOC,  Etc. 

JUSTICE  OF  THE  SUPREME  COURT  OF  ONTARIO. 

It  is  no  small  privilege  which  is  given  me  this  morning 
in  being  permitted  to  address  you,  young  men  and  women 
of  this  University.  For  more  than  forty  years  connected 
more  or  less  closely  with  Universities  and  University 
life,  I  am  more  and  more  convinced  that  the  future  of 
the  nation  and  of  the  world  depends,  as  it  should 
depend,  on  the  University — on  the  output  of  the 
University. 

While  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  even  those  who 
receive  the  benefits  of  the  higher  and  the  highest  edu- 
cation will  be  wholly  exempt  from  the  failings  and  short- 
comings of  our  common  humanity,  they  must  needs 
be  trained  to  think  and  to  discriminate,  to  differentiate 
the  superficial  and  ephemeral  from  the  essential  and 
eternal. 

It  is  with  full  consciousness  of  the  manner  of  men 
and  women  I  am  addressing,  that  I  speak:  I  may  not 
carry  you  with  me  in  all  respects;  but  at  least,  in  a 
University  audience,  careful  thought  must  go  before 
adjudication,  reasoned  judgment  before  condemnation 
as  deliberate  and  well-grounded  approbation  before 
acceptance. 

Civis  Britannicus  sum — Canadian  to  the  finger  tips 
— proud  of  the  flag  which  floats  over  my  northern  homo, 

l 


that  flag  which  has  braved  a  thousand  years  the  battle 
and  the  breeze,  I  come  to  Boston  as  to  the  cradle  of  a 
movement  which  has  done  much  to  make  my  flag  and 
my  land  what  they  are:  Canada,  a  land  to  be  desired 
and  my  British  citizenship  worth  while.  Not  wholly 
as  a  stranger  or  a  foreigner  do  I  come,  but  as  in  some 
sense  a  kinsman- — for  your  people  and  mine  cannot  be 
considered  wholly  alien  from  each  other— yet  I  recog- 
nize that  we  are  not  of  the  same  allegiance;  and  I  can 
quite  understand  that  it  may  sound  strangely  in  the  ear 
of  an  American  for  a  non-American  to  speak  as  I  have 
done,  even  if  our  language  is  the  same  and  in  great 
measure  our  descent. 

It  is  not  idle  compliment  but  deep-felt,  well-justified 
conviction  which  calls  from  a  Canadian  this  tribute  to 
your  city — a  sense  of  gratitude  as  well  as  of  fellowship. 

Our  rugged  forefathers  in  the  infancy — or  at  least 
the  childhood — of  the  race,  met  in  their  rude  gatherings 
and  decided  the  course  to  be  pursued  by  sept  Or  clan. 
This  could  not  continue  when  the  clan  or  sept  became 
a  nation,  numerous  and  wide-spread;  every  man  could 
not  be  present  at  a  central  point;  the  voice  of  every  man 
could  not  be  heard;  only  a  few  could  be  engaged  in 
government.  The  experiment  was  tried  of  these  few 
being  selected  by  the  King — the  King's  Council,  by 
whatever  name  called — and  the  government  of  the 
people  wholly  guided  by  these,  responsible  to  the  one 
man  who  chose  them. 

That  system  lasted  for  many  generations,  and  it  is 
not  even  yet  entirely  effete  among  civilized  nations.  In 
most  instances  the  adviser  was  either  a  priest  or  a  noble, 
a  man  noble  by  birth  or  made  noble  by  his  Royal  Master; 
and  the  ennobled  and  their  descendants,  with  the  higher 
orders  of  the  priesthood,  made  a  class,  a  preserve  by 
itself,  from  which  most  servants  of  the  Crown  were 
chosen. 

This  could  never  be  wholly  satisfactory,  and  a  system 
was  adopted  whereby  the  governed  c^ose  from  among 
themselves  representatives  to  express  and  assert  their 
wishes,  their  needs,  their  aspirations.    At  first  but  those 

2 


who  are  called  the  upper  classes  were  allowed  to  have 
any  choice  in  the  selection  of  representatives;  but  even 
then,  many  and  bitter  were  the  struggles  between  the  one 
element,  at  least  partially  popular,  and  the  other,  a  caste. 
The  one  grew  more  and  more  powerful  until  it  could 
measure  itself  against  not  only  the  Noble  class  but  even 
against  the  King  himself;  and  personal  rule  seemed  to 
meet  its  doom  when  the  head  of  Charles  Stuart  fell  at 
Whitehall. 

But  there  was  a  recrudescence  of  personal  and 
kingly  rule;  the  class  of  people  to  choose  representatives 
remained  much  the  same  and  the  representatives  were 
subject  to  kingly  influence,  so  that  almost  as  much  as 
before,  the  King  ruled,  though  he  ruled  in  form  through 
these  representatives — these  in  theory  representing  the 
people. 

In  the  American  colonies  were  many  ardent  lovers  of 
freedom  and  self-government,  who  desired  the  substance 
as  well  as  the  form.  In  the  Mother  Country  was  a  King 
who  believed  himself  to  have  been  specially  chosen  by 
Providence  to  govern;  he  thought  that  so  long  and 
so  far  as  he  could  procure  the  majority  of  those  who 
in  theory  were  the  representatives  of  the  people,  so  long 
and  so  far  was  he  entitled  to  govern  all  the  people  of  the 
Realm.  George  III.  was  a  sincerely  pious  and  con- 
scientious man;  and  there  never  was  a  grosser  calumny 
than  to  charge  the  errors  of  his  political  conduct  to  defect 
in  his  moral  character.  He  anxiously  endeavoured  to 
do  his  duty  as  he  saw  it;  and  his  failure  to  govern  the 
American  Colonies  wisely  would  have  been  the  failure 
of  almost  any  other  who  did  not  know  America  and 
Americans  at  first  hand.  His  theory  of  government  was 
that  of  most  of  the  governing  class  in  England  at  the 
time.  Many  of  the  American  people  refused  to  admit 
that  persons  chosen  by  a  class  in  an  island  across  the 
seas  represented  them,  and  insisted  that  they  should  be 
governed  by  and  through  representatives  of  their  own 
choosing. 

As  under  the  Stuart  the  century  before,  while  most 
objected  to  arbitrary  measures,  the  people  divided  not 

3 


very  unequally  upon  whether  armed  resistance  should  be 
resorted  to  or  more  peaceful  and  moderate  means 
adopted — divided  into  Roundhead  and  Cavalier — so 
under  the  Guelph,  while  most  Americans  resented  their 
treatment,  they  divided  not  very  unequally  upon  armed 
resistance  or  constitutional  opposition.  The  Revolution- 
ists claimed  the  name  of  Patriots — their  enemies  called 
them  Rebels ;  the  other  party  were  detestable  Tories  or 
United  Empire  Loyalists,  according  to  the  point  of  view. 

Bitter  things  were  said  by  each  class  of  the  other, 
some  of  them  true.  Revolutions  are  necessarily  non- 
moral  ;  rosewater  neither  creates  nor  quells  great  public 
movements,  and  neither  elections  nor  battles  are  always 
won  by  prayer  alone.  Time  has  not  wholly  allayed 
the  feeling  of  antagonism;  but  it  is  dying  out,  and 
I,  though  knowing  that  youth  is  always  intolerant 
and  believing  with  Plato  that  patriotism  is  neces- 
sarily cruel  (and  I  add,  unjust) — nevertheless  I  now 
venture  to  say  to  a  young  and  patriotic  audience 
that  in  essence  and  in  the  main  both  classes  were 
much  alike,  and  both  alike  were  ardent  and  sincere 
lovers  of  their  country.  Descendants  of  Cavalier 
and  Roundhead  can  do  justice  to  the  ancestors  of  the 
other;  and  Daughters  of  the  Revolution  and  Daughters 
of  the  Empire,  the  Society  of  the  Cincinnati  and  the 
United  Empire  Loyalist  Association  might  unite  in  their 
celebration  and  agree  that  each  should  recognize  virtue 
in  the  ancestor  of  the  other.  It  may  not  be  of  evil  omen 
that  Boston  University  is  to-day  holding  its  Commence- 
ment on  the  birthday  of  King  George  V. 

It  is  idle  to  speak  of  the  stamp  tax,  the  duty  upon 
tea,  an  impost  here,  a  restriction  there,  as  being  the  cause 
of  the  American  Revolution.  These  were  but  the  tokens, 
the  outward  excrescences,  which  could  not  hide  the 
essential  and  fundamental — the  determination  to  govern 
themselves,  inherent  in  all  of  the  descent  which  the 
Patriots  claimed.  Kings  they  could  abide,  for  who  so 
loyal  as  they,  so  long  as  they  could  be  loyal?  An 
appointed  Governor  was  not  only  tolerated  but  was  even 
regarded  with  affection,  so  long  as  he  did  not  attempt 

4 


to  impose  upon  them  the  will  of  others;  but  that  they 
should  be  in  fact  governed  by  themselves,  whatever  the 
form,  they  were  determined. 

Nor  were  they  insensible  to  the  importance  of  carry- 
ing with  them  their  Northern  neighbour;  her,  they 
desired  as  the  fourteenth  colony.  Not  long  before,  when 
Canada  was  French,  the  cry  of  the  Bostonians  was 
"  Canada  est  delenda  " — so  said  Governor  Dummer. 
"  Canada  must  be  demolished — delenda  est  Carthago — 
or  we  are  undone,"  cried  Governor  Livingston  of  New 
Jersey;  and  the  pastor  of  the  old  South  Church  in 
Boston  joined  in  the  cry  with  statesmen  throughout 
all  New  England.  But  now  Canada  become  British 
was  to  be  won,  not  destroyed;  and  every  means 
was  to  be  taken  for  that  purpose.  John  Brown,  the 
forerunner  of  another  John  Brown  nearly  a  century 
later,  and  like  him  a  hater  of  human  servitude,  ventured 
his  life  in  a  mission  to  Montreal.  The  Continental  Con- 
gress addressed  a  letter  to  the  Canadians ;  turgid  as  to  our 
present-day  taste  it  is,  with  its  appeals  to  philosophy, 
it  was  in  deadly  earnest;  the  writers  were  little  given 
to  idle  frivolity,  and  the  times  were  already  trying  men's 
souls.  When  persuasion  failed  the  sword  was  appealed 
to — the  mad  raid  of  Ethan  Allen,  the  Argonautic  expe- 
dition of  Arnold,  the  campaign  of  Montgomery,  which, 
with  its  early  summer  sunshine  of  success  was  over- 
whelmed with  the  black  winter  night  of  failure,  disaster 
and  death. 

But  without  Canada,  and  in  spite  of  her,  the  men  of 
Boston  and  those  of  like  mind,  fought  on  to  the  triumph 
of  their  cause;  for  they  could  dream  and  not  make 
dreams  their  master,  could  think  and  not  make  thoughts 
their  aim. 

You  are  proud  of  Boston  and  her  past;  and  you  do 
well.  Your  eyes  fill  with  proud  tears,  your  hearts  with 
proud  exultation  when  you  think  of  Bunker  Hill;  and 
with  justice.  And  I,  a  Canadian  and  a  Briton,  stand 
here  and  openly  proclaim  that  I  am  as  proud  as  you,  as 
deeply  grateful  as  you  can  be;  for,  as  those  embattled 
farmers  stood  in  their  stern  array  one  hundred  and  forty 

5 


years  ago,  their  ranks  unwavering  if  uneven  and  owing 
little  to  the  drill  sergeant,  filled  with  patriotic  fervour, 
risking  and  willing  to  give  all  for  freedom  and  self- 
government,  they  stood  not  only  for  themselves  and 
succeeding  generations  of  Americans,  but  for  Canada 
and  for  every  British  Colony;  nay  (as  has  been  said 
more  than  once)  for  England  herself,  for  everything  that 
makes  England  the  England  we  know  and  all  that  makes 
the  British  Empire  worth  while. 

The  freedom  they  forcibly  achieved  for  themselves, 
has  been  readily,  cheerfully  and  ungrudgingly  granted 
to  the  remaining  colonies — the  Commonwealth  of  Aus- 
tralia, the  Dominion  of  New  Zealand,  the  South  African 
Union  as  well  as  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  are  wholly 
self-governing,  and  free  with  a  freedom  which  would 
have  more  than  satisfied  the  heroes  who  fought  on  the 
field  where  Warren  fell. 

And  the  democracy  fully  established  on  this  Con- 
tinent reacted  upon  the  mother  country;  and  it  is  at 
least  in  part  due  to  that  reaction  that  now  the  common 
man  has  his  say  in  the  selection  of  those  who  will  make 
laws  for  him.  The  House  of  Privilege,  still  standing  in 
form,  has  been  shorn  of  its  power,  it  is  no  longer  the  final 
judge  of  what  is  right;  and  the  King,  once  all-powerful, 
is  glad  to  be  relieved  of  the  burden  of  government.  The 
King  now  reigns  but  does  not  rule,  while  the  President 
of  the  United  States  rules  but  does  not  reign. 

The  principles  of  freedom  underlying  the  conception 
of  government  in  the  English-speaking  peoples  were  not 
born  in  your  Revolution.  The  Revolution  was  but  the 
logical  outcome  of  principles  elaborated,  declared  and  to 
a  certain  extent  lived  up  to  for  centuries  before;  but  the 
Revolution  emblazoned  them  in  letters  of  fire  to  be 
known  and  read  of  all  men  and  never  to  be  forgotten 
while  the  earth  remaineth.  The  earth  will  sooner  be 
shaken  from  her  place  and  the  pillars  thereof  sooner 
tremble  than  the  fundamental  right  of  a  free  man  to 
choose  his  own  governor  fail  of  full  fruition. 

A  Canadian  thankfully  acknowledging  the  leadership 
of  this  City  in  matters  of  civil  freedom,  may  nevertheless 

6 


say  with  some  pride  that  it  was  not  Boston  or  Massachu- 
setts which  led  in  the  cause  of  religious  freedom,  freedom 
to  worship  God  in  the  form  each  man  desired.  The 
Pilgrim  Fathers  were  not  content  to  worship  God  in 
their  own  way,  but  they  desired  to  make  all  others  follow 
their  method.  It  was  the  defect  of  the  time.  My  own 
collateral  ancestors  on  either  side  sealed  their  faith  with 
their  blood  on  the  scaffold,  but  Riddell  and  Renwick 
would  undoubtedly,  had  they  had  the  power,  been  execu- 
tioners and  their  judges  the  victims  and  they  would  have 
been  perfectly  confident  that  they  were  thereby  doing 
God  service  and  approving  themselves  good  Christians. 

We  must  come  to  Canada  to  find  the  first  English- 
speaking  country  to  allow  complete  freedom  of  religion. 
After  the  Reformation  (I  do  not  speak  of  Maryland, 
anomalous  in  many  respects),  Canada  was  the  first  to 
allow  the  Roman  Catholic  to  take  part  in  legislation  and 
to  be  a  freeman  in  every  respect  equal  to  the  Protestant. 
And  indeed  it  was  one  of  the  strongest  charges  levelled 
by  the  Continental  Congress  against  the  Imperial 
Government  and  King  George  that  they  tolerated  a 
religion  "  bloody,  idolatrous  and  hypocritical." 

We  have  in  most,  if  not  in  all,  English-speaking  com- 
munities got  far  away  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
Revolutionary  fathers.  We  think  Carroll  of  Carrollton 
just  as  good  a  patriot,  as  thorough  a  Republican  as  John 
Hancock  or  Samuel  Adams. 

But  the  proper  course  in  matters  pertaining  to  civil 
government  may  still  be  to  discuss  and  to  determine. 

Here,  then,  is  the  true  field  of  the  University.  "  Let 
them  obey  who  know  not  how  to  rule,"  said  the  proud 
Plantagenet;  and  he  read  well  the  signs  of  his  times. 
Now,  those  who  know  not  how  to  rule  are  not  made 
slaves  with  no  part  in  the  Commonwealth  except  to  serve 
and  obey;  they  choose  those  who  are  to  rule  and  in  no 
small  measure  how  they  are  to  rule.  We  do  not  say 
"Jack  is  as  good  as  his  master,"  but  it  is  because  Jack 
knows  no  master.  In  the  nature  of  things  there  must 
be'  leaders.  It  is  said  that  during  the  evil  days 
of    the    French    Revolution    a    mob    was    hastening 

7 


past  a  house  where  sat,  with  a  friend,  one  much 
in  the  public  eye.  "  Where  are  they  going  ?"  said  his 
friend.  "  I  do  not  know,  but  I  must  go  with  them, 
for  I  am  their  leader,"  was  the  reply.  Even  in  that 
crowd  there  were  leaders,  though  perhaps  not  those 
ostensibly  such — no  movement  is  purely  spontaneous. 
There  always  have  been  and  there  always  will  be — 
human  nature  remaining  the  same — men  to  whom  their 
fellows  look  for  light  and  guidance. 

And  where  are  they  to  be  found?  Not  in  the 
cloistered  shade  haunted  by  the  recluse  and  the  misan- 
thrope. 

Herodotus  tells  of  the  envoys  sent  to  Delphi  by  the 
Dolonci  to  consult  the  Oracle.  The  Pythia  said  "  The 
first  man  who  offers  you  hospitality,  take  with  you." 
Miltiades,  son  of  Cypselus,  sat  by  his  door  in  the  cool 
of  the  evening,  and  seeing  them  on  the  highway  aweary, 
invited  them  into  his  house,  and  so  became  their 
King.  Axylus  sung  by  Homer  who  lived  by  the  side 
of  the  road  was  the  friend  to  man,  for  he  loved  all — 

(IldvTas  yap  q)ikhaKevy  odcp  i'ni  oiuia  vaioDv.) 

Diomedes,  the  mighty  master  of  the  warcry,  slew  him, 
but  he  was  not  a  failure,  his  name  and  fame  are  eternal, 
embalmed  in  deathless  verse. 

"  There  are  hermit  souls  that  live  withdrawn 
In  the  place  of  their  self  content; 
There  are  souls  like  stars  that  dwell  apart 
In  a  fellowless  firmament  "; 

and  they  often  are  the  very  elect;  but  they  must  be  few 
in  number. 

He  who  shuns  his  fellows,  may  have  a  high  mission, 
a  lofty  outlook,  and  he  may  be  worthy  of  all  praise.  But 
there  must  be  some  to  mingle  with  the  people,  to  know 
their  needs  at  first  hand,  to  take  an  immediate  and  not 
simply  a  mediate  part  in  directing  their  thoughts  and 
their  aspirations.  Those  who  do  that,  there  must  always 
be,  whether  worthy  or  unworthy,  whether  for  good  or 
for  ill. 

8 


Is  that  function  to  be  left  to  the  ward  heeler,  to  the 
boss  who  makes  his  living  by  it,  to  the  party  hack  with 
no  thought  above  the  immediate  success  of  some 
scheme?  It  is  not  unusual  in  your  land,  as  it  is  not 
unusual  in  mine,  to  speak  contemptously  of  the 
politician,  as  though  it  were  a  degradation  to  take  part 
in  the  government  of  the  country;  a  disgrace  to  put  into 
practice  that  for  which  your  forefathers  fought  and 
died.  A  Washington,  a  Jefferson,  an  Adams,  a  Lincoln 
— these  may  receive  commendation,  for  they  were  states- 
men. He  was  wise  who  first  said  that  the  difference 
between  a  politician  and  a  statesman  is  that  the  statesman 
is  dead. 

Some  one  must  lead;  who  is  it  to  be?  "Freely  ye 
have,  freely  give."  The  inestimable  gift  of  civil  free- 
dom, the  highest  privilege  an  honourable  man  may  enjoy 
is  yours  as  a  birthright. 

"  We  must  be  free  or  die  who  speak  the  tongue 
That  Shakspere  spoke,  the  faith  and  morals  hold 
Which  Milton  held.,, 

You  have  been  educated  in  an  institution  where 
thought  is  free  as  the  air  you  breathe,  you  have  been 
trained  to  think,  your  whole  education  has  been  to  cast 
off  from  your  minds  and  souls  the  trammels  of  ignorance, 
of  superstition  and  of  cant,  the  example  of  the  great  and 
good  of  all  ages  has  been  ever  held  before  your  eyes  and 
you  have  been  taught  to  fear  God  and  to  eschew  evil. 

Noblesse  oblige;  and  as  "with  the  same  measure 
that  ye  mete  withal  it  shall  be  measured  to  you  again, " 
so  with  the  same  measure  with  which  it  has  been  meas- 
ured to  you,  with  that  measure,  mete  ye. 

This  University  was  not  founded  simply  to  give  in- 
formation to  intending  ministers  or  doctors  or  lawyers  or 
engineers.  Those  who  bore  the  burden  and  heat  of  the 
day  when  Boston  University  was  but  a  young  and  strug- 
gling institution  did  not  have  in  view  simply  learned 
savants,  acute  theologians,  skilful  surgeons,  astute  and 
subtle  lawyers.  These  indeed  they  hoped  for  and 
expected;  but  their  desire  was  for  men  and  women  who 


should  indeed  know  their  rights,  and  knowing  dare  main- 
tain, 'but  who  should  also  their  duty  know.  Brilliant 
graduates,  graduates  of  compelling  ability  who  should 
make  their  Alma  Mater  famous  in  their  own  fame,  their 
fa|th  gave  them  to  foresee,  and  they  have  not  been  dis- 
appointed; but  most  they  wished  graduates  who  should 
recognize  their  duty  to  their  God,  to  the  world,  to  their 
country  and  their  fellow-countrymen. 

And  it  should  be  the  glory  of  a  University  that  from 
its  walls  go  forth  the  leaders  of  the  people.  If  the 
blind  lead  the  blind,  both  shall  fall  into  the  ditch;  it  is 
the  function  of  a  University  to  supply  those  who  can  see, 
who  both  can  and  will  prevent  their  countrymen  from 
falling  into  the  ditches  that  are  all  too  common,  ditches 
of  ignorance,  ditches  of  prejudice,  ditches  of  class  hatred, 
ditches  of  international  ill-will,  ditches  which  lead  to 
national  discord  or  it  may  be  to  bloody  devastating  war. 
"  He  loved  his  fellow  men  "  is  the  greatest  praise  which 
an  honourable  man  should  covet,  if  that  love  has  been 
made  manifest  in  deed  and  not  in  empty  rhetoric.  If 
love  of  fellow  men  be  not  the  effect  of  University  study 
and  training,  better  that  the  University  should  cease  to 
exist.  It  is  for  the  public  service,  the  public  good,  that 
public  support  is  given  to  such  institutions  of  learning, 
and  the  public  should  in  common  honesty  receive  the 
reward  which  is  due. 

The  neighbouring  college  which  trained  a  Garfield, 
the  venerable  and  historic  elder  sister  across  the  way 
which  gave  this  land  a  Roosevelt,  and  that  of  another 
State  which  produced  a  Taft,  or  another  a  Wilson,  did 
not  crush  in  their  minds  the  desire  for  public  service. 
It  may  be  that  the  true  place  in  history  of  some  of  these 
is  not  certain,  but  that  the  United  States  and  the  world 
are  the  better  for  their  having  lived,  few  will  gainsay 
— big  men,  true  men,  tried  men  filled  with  a  common 
patriotism  for  a  common  country. 

All  the  problems  of  government  have  not  been  solved ; 
many  remain  calling  for  the  clearest  thinking,  the 
renunciation  of  prejudice,  honest  and  sincere  determina- 
tion to  do  the  thing  that  is  right.  "  Because  right  is  right, 

10 


to  follow  right,"    is   "wisdom   in    the  scorn  of  conse- 
quence. " 

As  an  outsider,  I  can  see  many  such — the  conflict 
between  labour  and  capital  (or  rather  between  some  who 
are  thought  to  represent  labour  and  capital) ,  the  old  but 
ever  new  question  of  the  tariff,  for  no  tariff  can  be  per- 
manent, at  least  not  without  constant  defence  against 
constant  attack;  the  problem  of  the  black  race  and  their 
uplift,  upon  the  solution  of  which  almost  certainly  will 
depend  the  prosperity  of  the  Southern  States  and  per- 
haps that  of  the  Northern  States  as  well;  prohibition  and 
whether  it  prohibits  or  when  the  evil  spirit  of  intemper- 
ance is  thought  to  be  driven  out  for  good,  has  he  not 
simply  gone  and  taken  with  him  seven  other  spirits  more 
wicked  than  himself,  and  have  they  not  entered  into  the 
house  empty,  swept  and  garnished  and  dwelt  there,  so 
that  the  last  state  is  worse  than  the  first?  Are  noble, 
thoroughly  educated  women  to  have  a  voice  in  what  this 
country  is  to  do,  or  must  they  pay  the  traditional  pen- 
alty, bear  the  traditional  disability  of  their  sex? 
An  American  woman,  a  graduate  of  Boston  Uni- 
versity, perhaps  with  property  and  certainly  with 
brains — is  she  to  see  the  navvy,  descended  from 
long  generations  of  serfs  and  himself  a  newcomer 
on  this  continent,  understanding  our  language  but 
little,  our  institutions  still  less,  casting  his  ballot,  while 
she  must  stand  helpless  by,  because  God  made  her  a 
woman?  The  specious  talk  about  women  being  repre- 
sented by  their  fathers,  husbands,  brothers  or  sons 
reminds  one  of  the  contention  a  hundred  years  ago  that 
the  American  colonists  were  virtually  represented  in  the 
House  of  Parliament;  this  met  its  well-deserved  doom  at 
the  mouth  of  the  cannon,  the  edge  of  the  sword;  is  the 
other,  still  heard  even  in  the  cradle  of  the  Revolution, 
more  in  accord  with  reason  and  justice?  In  the  present 
system  in  some  lands  the  woman  can  exercise  an  influ- 
ence only  as  did  the  slave  in  the  Roman  times  and  later 
— coax,  but  not  persuade;  wheedle,  but  not  argue;  talk, 
but  not  act.  I  do  not  say  that  this  is  wrong — many 
of  the  grandest  women  the  world  ever  saw  think  it  is 

11 


right.  The  question  must  be  settled  not  by  prejudice 
or  appeals  to  old-established  rules  and  customs,  but  by 
reason,  by  arguments  based  upon  justice  and  eternal 
right.  Whatever  be  the  view  one  may  entertain,  he 
should  support  it  by  reasoning  which  appeals  to  the  intel- 
ligence— and  to  that  kind  of  reasoning  women  are  as 
responsive  as  men,  for  they  are  to  at  least  as  great  an 
extent  as  men  intelligent  beings.  They  who  settle — 
and  settle  right — this  are  as  deserving  as  the  Fathers 
who  settled  right  the  question  of  the  government  of  the 
thirteen  colonies — and  it  will  not  down  until  it  is  settled 
and  settled  right. 

Not  long  ago,  I  asked  the  students  of  another  Amer- 
ican University  to  answer  for  themselves  certain  ques- 
tions. (I  have  no  opinion  on  these  and  have  no  right  to 
express  it  if  I  had,  for  I  am  not  an  American  citizen) : 
"  Is  the  Democrat  a  traitor  to  business  prosperity  ?  And 
is  the  Republican  a  traitor  to  the  consumer?  Is  the  Pro- 
gressive a  wild-eyed,  impossible  enthusiast?  Is  the 
Standpatter  tied  hand  and  foot  to  '  the  interests '  ?  Is  the 
President  of  the  United  States  a  receiver  of  stolen  goods 
and  Wilson  the  nominee  of  the  Trusts?  Is  Colonel 
Roosevelt  a  self-seeking  demagogue  who  would  break  up 
a  historic  party  for  his  own  selfish  ambition?  Is  the 
Bull  Moose  nothing  but  a  big  overgrown  bully  who 
thinks  of  nothing  but  himself  and  cannot  keep  away 
from  the  light  however  fatal  that  may  be,  or  is  he  a 
noble  creature,  king  of  forest  and  plain,  splendidly  show- 
ing the  way  for  the  weaker  to  follow  ?"  Some  of  these 
questions  may  have  been  answered  or  may  have 
answered  themselves  since  they  were  first  asked  nine- 
teen months  ago ;  but  the  like  grave  and  important  ques- 
tions are  still  pending,  and  must  in  the  nature  of  things 
arise  from  time  to  time.  They  must  be  answered  in  some 
way  in  fact  and  in  deed,  if  not  in  word.  Where  are  the 
men  and  women  who  will  show  how  they  should  be 
answered  ?  They  should  be  here ;  and  it  was  not  he  who 
hid  his  talent  in  a  napkin  that  received  the  Master's  word 
"Well  done,  good  and  faithful  servant." 

I  have  said  nothing  of  religion.  I  know  that  this 
University  is  a  Christian  University,  that  religion  is  of 

12 


its  very  essence;  that  non-sectarian  as  it  is,  it  does  not 
look  with  indifference  and  unconcern  upon  the  spiritual 
state  of  its  students.  Nevertheless,  I  have  thought  it 
well  not  to  cite  the  teachings  of  our  holy  religion,  but  to 
address  you  purely  from  a  secular  standpoint.  If,  in- 
deed, pure  religion  and  undefiled  were  the  mistress  of 
thought  and  action,  nothing  I  have  said  needed  saying. 

All  the  national  questions  which  have  been  suggested, 
important  as  they  are,  pale  almost  into  insignificance 
compared  with  the  greater  question  which  has  tortured 
the  world  from  times  primeval.  Our  intra-national  ques- 
tions we  can  settle  by  the  ballot,  disputes  between  man 
and  man  we  can  settle  by  the  Courts  or  by  arbitration; 
how  are  we  to  settle  international  questions,  disputes 
between  nation  and  nation?  Nature,  red  in  tooth  and 
claw,  shrieks  loudly  "the  survival  of  the  fittest " — not  the 
best  and  noblest,  but  the  strongest,  the  best  fitted  to  the 
environment.  In  a  very  real  sense  "  the  whole  creation 
groaneth  and  travaileth  in  pain."  If  nature  were  the 
last  word  of  God  as  she  is  the  first,  we  must  needs  bow; 
sic  volo,  sic  jubeoy  stat  pro  ratione  voluntas;  but  the 
natural  man,  the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God;  the 
moral  and  ultimate  governor  cannot  be  as  the  brute  crea- 
tion; He  must  be  as  our  highest  thought  demands. 

Nothing  can  be  good  in  Him 
Which  evil  is  in  me, 

and  blood  and  agony  and  death  cannot  be  the  final  argu- 
ment.    Might  never  yet  made  right. 

The  savage,  unbridled  by  reason  and  justice,  vindi- 
cates his  right  by  his  own  strong  arm.  Too  often  the 
savage  remains  imbedded  in  the  nation,  and  what  it 
wishes  it  takes.  It  is  the  glory  of  modern  civilization 
that  all  questions  between  individuals  shall  be  settled 
by  an  impartial  tribunal  on  rules  based  upon  the  eternal 
principles  of  justice  and  right.  No  personal  pride  or 
sence  of  personal  honour  justifies  an  individual  with- 
drawing himself  from  the  jurisdiction  of  that  tribunal. 
How  do  we  settle  questions  between  peoples?  and  do  we 
not  sometimes  think  and  say  that  national  pride,  national 

13 


honour  demands  force  and  justifies  withdrawal  of  the 
national  cause  from  all  international  adjudication? 

I  am  not  a  peace-at-any-price  man ;  war  in  my  view 
is  unhappily  sometimes  not  only  a  right  but  even  a  duty. 
A  standing  army  and  a  navy  constitute,  in  the  existing 
state  of  humanity,  a  safeguard  like  a  police  force.  In 
the  general  case,  however,  of  international  disputes,  war 
can  no  more  be  necessary  than  it  is  necessary  for  two 
persons  who  have  a  dispute  to  fight  it  out  with  lance  or 
club  as  was  the  custom  centuries  ago  in  England. 

Your  country  and  mine  a  hundred  years  ago  were  at 
war — a  war  against  which  this  State,  the  mother  of 
heroes,  protested  and  voted  as  long  as  she  could,  a  war 
which  came  near  to  rending  the  Union  in  twain,  a  war 
which  retarded  the  development  of  my  Province  more 
than  a  quarter  of  a  century.  I  do  not  mean  to  go  into 
the  causes  of  that  war;  some  of  them  may  yet  be  obscure, 
and  the  whole  story  may  not  yet  have  been  told.  Neither 
shall  I  dwell  upon  the  indirect  results  of  the  war,  costly, 
bloody  as  it  was.  Just  about  a  century  ago,  American 
soldiers  were  burning  the  Capital  of  Upper  Canada  and 
destroying  the  Parliament  Buildings  and  Public  Library 
there,  kicking  the  volumes  along  the  streets  of  York; 
British  soldiers  were  destroying  the  Capitol  at  Washing- 
ton. Goth  and  Vandal  were  not  much  worse,  and  yet 
it  was  the  logic  of  war.  Both  peoples  got  tired  of  the 
fratricidal  struggle  and  both  agreed  to  leave  off  as  they 
had  begun.  The  war  settled  nothing;  each  set  of  nego- 
tiators thought  they  had  secured — and  they  had  secured 
— a  triumph  when  they  got  the  other  side  to  refrain  from 
insisting  upon  stipulations  which  would  modify  the 
status  quo  ante  helium. 

We  have  four  thousand  miles  of  international  boun- 
dary without  a  soldier  or  a  fortification;  we  have  thou- 
sands of  square  miles  of  international  waters  for  nearly 
a  hundred  years  unpolluted  by  the  keel  of  a  ship  of  war. 
During  that  hundred  years  there  have  never  been  diffi- 
culties so  great — and  there  have  been  great  difficulties— 
never  controversies  so  acute — and  there  have  been  acute 
controversies  —  never  misunderstandings,   charges  of 

14 


wrong  and  recriminations,  heart  burnings  and  bitter 
resentment  so  overpowering,  and  all  these  there  have 
been  and  too  often,  that  it  was  necessary  for  brother  to 
raise  up  his  hand  against  brother  and  dye  his  hand  in  a 
brother's  blood. 

Leaving  aside  the  settlement  of  the  boundary  at  the 
St.  Croix  River,  and  the  mutual  claims  of  American  and 
Briton  settled  under  Jay's  Treaty  of  1794,  for  these 
were  before  the  War,  we  have  since  that  war  by  peaceful 
means,  means  at  least  analogous  to  a  Court,  settled  the 
boundary  at  Passamaquoddy  Bay,  along  the  Great 
Lakes  and  International  Rivers,  at  Vancouver  Island,  at 
Alaska,  the  obligation  to  pay  for  runaway  slaves  taking 
refuge  under  the  folds  of  the  Union  Jack  and  refusing 
to  return  to  the  land  of  the  free  and  the  home  of  the 
brave,  for  they  knew  that  in  all  the  broad  land  there  was 
no  place  where  they  might  be  free,  none  where  for  them 
to  be  brave  was  not  torture  and  ignominious  death;  the 
right  of  American  fishermen  to  take  cod,  of  Canadian 
sealers  to  take  seal,  what  the  United  States  should  pay 
for  land  belonging  to  British  subjects,  for  fish  taken  in 
British  waters,  what  Britain  should  pay  for  American 
ships  wrongly  taken,  and  for  her  defective  municipal 
laws  allowing  the  escape  of  a  Confederate  cruiser.  All 
these  and  more  by  arbitration;  diplomacy  settled  the 
north-eastern  boundary,  after  arbitration  failed,  and  the 
boundary  from  the  Lakes  to  the  Pacific  after  threat  of 
war  (though  "  Fifty-four  forty  or  fight  "  may  have  only 
been  an  election  cry) . 

Loud  cries  of  injured  national  honour,  of  infringe- 
ment of  national  territory,  were  heard  on  either  side  of 
the  line;  but  the  plain  common-sense,  the  Christian  senti- 
ment of  the  mass  of  the  peoples  stilled  the  cry  of  the 
jingo,  and  war  was  not. 

The  example  of  two  such  nations  as  these  might  well 
be  followed  by  others,  and  in  good  time  it  must  and  will 
be  followed.  No. doubt  the  watchman  on  the  tower 
Will  often  hear  the  anxious  question,  "  Watchman,  what 
of  the  night?"  before,  looking  eastward  he  can  say, 
"The  morning  cometh,"  without  adding  "and  also  the 

15 


night."     But  that  answer  will  be  made.     Weary  hearts  jj 
looking  for  world  peace  will  again  and  again  be  sad- 1! 
dened  by  wars  and  rumours  of  wars;  but  these  must! 
cease  at  length.     Christ  died  upon  the  tree  to  save  man- 
kind, and  nineteen  centuries  after  his  sacrifice  but  the! 
fringe  of  heathendom  has  heard  the  good  news ;  yet  his  | 
kingdom  is  secure,  his  throne  as  the  days  of  Heaven. 

Even  if  there  is  not  to  be  a  world  peace,  there  may] 
at  least  be  peace  so  far  as  your  great  nation  is  con- 1 
cerned.     The  United  States  does  not  need  to  show  its 
power,  its  glory  is  gained  and  is  imperishable,  it  can  be  jm 
diminished  only  by  the  United  States  itself;  the  altruism  jjjj 
exhibited  in  the  case  of  Cuba,  the  ardent  love  of  peace  P 
exhibited  in  bringing  about  the  Conference  and  Treaty 
of  Portsmouth,  the  self-restraint  when  goaded  by  petty] 
shafts  of  malice  launched  by  the  mischief-seeking  and  1 
injuries  brought  about  by  those  desiring  war,  all  are  to 
its  credit. 

Are  the  graduates  of  Boston  University  to  aid  in  j 
maintaining  the  high  standard  set  by  their  country,  are  I 
they  to  seek  peace  and  ensue  it?  If  so,  they  mustj 
receive  the  blessing  pronounced  on  the  Mount  upon  the  j 
peacemakers. 

This  is  not  always  easy;  the  poetry,  the  glamour,  the 
romance  of  war  is  part  of  our  common  inheritance.     We  | 
are  fighting  animals  by  instinct,  our  literature  is  full  of; 
battle,  and  the  successful  general  becomes  the  President  j 
or  the  popular  hero.     Peace  is  tame  and  prosaic,  it 
appeals  not  to  the  eye  or  ear,  and  it  needs  a  strong  heart 
to  treasure  it  despite  the  blare  of  trumpets  and  flash  j 
of  swords. 

And  yet  it  must  triumph  or  all  moral  governance  of  j 
the  Universe  is  impossible.  Far,  far  back  the  Hebrew; 
prophet  saw  what  must  come  to  pass,  unless  there  is ! 
nothing  but  blind  chance.  "The  government  shall  be 
upon  His  shoulder,  and  His  name  shall  be  called  Won-; 
derful  .  .  .  The  Prince  of  Peace.  Of  the  increase  of  j 
His  government  and  peace  there  shall  be  no  end  .  .  ■  ;". 
The  zeal  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts  will  perform  this." 

Do  you  believe  it,  and  will  you  do  your  share? 

16 


